Slavery and Public History

The problem, as many of my classmates have already stated, is that changing minds about slavery and racism is often like talking to a brick wall. Ideas about race have passed down through generations and sometimes you’re a victim of backwards ideas just because of the place in which you were born. And, forgive me for the gross stereotyping, but the people who often need their minds opened the most, are the least likely to hit up a museum on a Saturday afternoon. So how do we educate and tell the real stories without “ostracizing” large groups of people or going to war with school boards?

I’m all for heavy, uncomfortable dialogue. These stories need to be told.  Make white people feel awful about slavery. We deserve it. And I’m all for two-sided arguments. Slavery doesn’t get to disappear into the abyss as an alternative fact – the very least we can do on the road to reparations is just admit to the brutal, ugly reality of what was done. Berlin’s quote from Garrison Frazier in 1865 hit me so hard that I had to put the book down and walk away for a moment. He defined slavery as “receiving by the irresistible power the work of another man, and not by his consent” (5). His definition highlights the pure simplicity of the matter: labor was needed, and using human beings against their will for capital gain was totally okay. And it had been totally okay for hundreds upon hundreds of years.

In some places, it’s still okay. And that’s half the reason we need to keep talking about it.

One thought on “Slavery and Public History”

  1. Marnie, I totally agree people should feel uncomfortable about slavery. The population makes us, as Americans, uncomfortable when talking about the Holocaust. These are uncomfortable events and should be approached that way so people will remember how it made them feel when they think about it. Race should not be the deciding factor of what is comfortable and what is not when it comes to history.

Comments are closed.